1 While some studies have suggested that frequent use of cell phones causes increased risk of brain and mouth cancers, others have found no such links. But since cell phones are relatively new and brain cancers grow slowly, many experts are now recommending taking steps to reduce exposure.by bruce stutz一些研究显示，经常使用手机会增加得脑部和口腔癌症的几率。
有的研究却没发现两者之间有什么联系。
但是，手机算是个新兴事物，而脑癌发展也缓慢，许多专家还是建议减少使用手机。
2 Does your cell phone increase your risk of brain cancer? Does it affect your skin or your sperm viability? Is it safe for pregnant women or children? Should you keep it in your bag, on your belt, in your pants or shirt pocket? Should you use a hands-free headset? Are present cell phone safety standards strict enough?手机会增加得脑癌的几率吗？会不会影响皮肤或者精子活性？使用手机对孕妇或孩子安全吗？应该把手机放在哪，包里、衣服口袋，还是挂在腰带上？打电话的时候要用耳机吗？现在的手机安全标准够不够严？3 You don’t know? You’re not alone.你不知道？这很正常。
4 With some 4 to5 billion cell phones now in use worldwide and hundreds of studies seeking evidence of their health effects published in peer-reviewed journals over the last 10 years, there’s precious little scientific certainty over whether cell phones pose any danger to those using them. For nearly every study that reports an effect, another, just as carefully conducted, finds none. All of which leaves journalists, consumer advocates, regulatory agencies, politicians, industry spokespersons, and cell phone users able to choose and interpret the results they prefer, or ignore the ones they don’t.如今，全世界共有40-50亿手机正在使用。
过去十年里，成百上千的研究也在致力于寻找手机影响健康的证据，并在相关刊物上发表论文。
但还没有确凿的证据能证明，使用手机损害健康。
几乎没有研究发现手机对健康有不良影响。
但这还是没影响到政治家、新闻记者、管理机构、产业发言人、消费者保护团体，还有消费者自己，选择他们喜好的结果去理解，忽略不喜欢的那些。
5 Do you, for instance, cite the studies that report adverse effects on sperm viability and motility, due to exposure to cell phone radiation or the studies that showed no —or mixed —results?6 Do you cite the 2001 study that found increased incidence of uveal melanoma (a cancer of the eye) among frequent cell phone users, or the 2009 study by the same authors that, in reassessing their data, found no increase?2001年的研究显示，常用手机的人患葡萄膜黑色素瘤（一种眼内癌症）几率会增大。
2009年这些研究员又发表报告称，他们再分析当年的数据时，又不能确定几率是否真会增大。
你是否也引用了以上结果呢？7 Do you cite the Israeli study that found an association between salivary gland cancer and heavy use of cell phones or the Swedish study that found none?以色列科学家发现唾液腺癌和经常使用手机有一定联系，瑞典科学家门确没得出这个结论。
你是否还引用过这些？8 Do you parse the data and report only those results that have found effects —no matter how small —without citing studies that found no effects? In its much-cited review of cell phone studies, the Environmental Working Group has done just that, reporting, for instance, that “a study from the University of California, Los Angeles, found a correlation between prenatal exposure to cell phone radiation and behavioral problems in children.”But the group left out the study’s very next sentence acknowledging that the association may be “noncausal and may be due to unmeasured confounding.”你是不是只引用发现不良影响的研究报告，不管其影响多么微乎其微？而从来对没发现不良影响的研究视而不见？环境工作小组就在关于手机的报告中引用了许多负面结论，例如：洛杉矶加州大学的一项研究发现胎儿受到手机辐射和长大后的行为问题有关。
但这个研究组在下一句中接着又承认这种关系可能“并没有因果关系，而且也许是其他因素共同作用造成的”。
9 The effects of cell phones have proven difficult to assess because they are relatively new, the way and the amount they’re used continues to evolve, and the problems that cell phones might cause are hard to detect. Brain cancers, for instance, are very rare cancers. They affect only some 18 out of every 100,000 people. But the fact that there’s been no recent increase in the numbers may be meaningless with regard to cell phone use since brain cancers are very slow-growing.众所周知，手机的影响很难估计。
因为手机还是个新鲜事物，人们使用手机的方式和数量也在不断改变，所以这个作用就很难检测。
举个例子，脑癌，这是一种很少见的癌症。
十万人但中只有18个人可能患脑癌。
事实上，最近几年，这个比例并没增长，这说明手机的使用和脑癌并没有因果关系。
10 Cell phones produce “non-ionizing”radiation, which, unlike X- or gamma rays, doesn’t damage DNA by stripping away electrons from molecules in cell tissue. Radiofrequency energy does, however, produce heat and, at high enough levels, can damage cell tissue. This, in the late 1990s, The question is whether safety standards are sufficient to protect against long-term exposure.prompted the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) in Europe to set limits on cell phones’Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) —the measure of the amount of radiofrequency energy a cell phone user absorbs —at, respectively, 1.6 and 2.0 watts per kilogram. The question remains, however, whether these standards are sufficient to protect against long-term exposures and whether the buildup of heat in cell tissues is more damaging where there’s less blood flow to dissipate it, such as the outer ear, brain,skin, or testes.手机产生“非电离”辐射，它不像X或伽马射线那样从细胞组织中的分子里分理出电子，从而破坏DNA。